• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

失语症测验的项目反应理论分析中的模型选择和样本量。

Model choice and sample size in item response theory analysis of aphasia tests.

机构信息

VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System and University of Pittsburgh, PA, USA.

出版信息

Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2012 May;21(2):S38-50. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360(2011/11-0090). Epub 2012 Jan 9.

DOI:10.1044/1058-0360(2011/11-0090)
PMID:22230175
Abstract

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to identify the most appropriate item response theory (IRT) measurement model for aphasia tests requiring 2-choice responses and to determine whether small samples are adequate for estimating such models.

METHOD

Pyramids and Palm Trees (Howard & Patterson, 1992) test data that had been collected from individuals with aphasia were analyzed, and the resulting item and person estimates were used to develop simulated test data for 3 sample size conditions. The simulated data were analyzed using a standard 1-parameter logistic (1-PL) model and 3 models that accounted for the influence of guessing: augmented 1-PL and 2-PL models and a 3-PL model. The model estimates obtained from the simulated data were compared to their known true values.

RESULTS

With small and medium sample sizes, an augmented 1-PL model was the most accurate at recovering the known item and person parameters; however, no model performed well at any sample size. Follow-up simulations confirmed that the large influence of guessing and the extreme easiness of the items contributed substantially to the poor estimation of item difficulty and person ability.

CONCLUSION

Incorporating the assumption of guessing into IRT models improves parameter estimation accuracy, even for small samples. However, caution should be exercised in interpreting scores obtained from easy 2-choice tests, regardless of whether IRT modeling or percentage correct scoring is used.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在确定最适合需要二选一反应的失语症测试的项目反应理论(IRT)测量模型,并确定小样本是否足以估计此类模型。

方法

分析了 Howard 和 Patterson(1992)的 Pyramids and Palm Trees 测试数据,这些数据是从失语症患者中收集的,所得的项目和个人估计值用于开发 3 种样本量条件下的模拟测试数据。使用标准的 1-参数逻辑(1-PL)模型和 3 种考虑猜测影响的模型(增强的 1-PL 和 2-PL 模型以及 3-PL 模型)对模拟数据进行分析。将从模拟数据中获得的模型估计值与它们的已知真实值进行比较。

结果

在小样本和中等样本量的情况下,增强的 1-PL 模型最能准确恢复已知的项目和个人参数;然而,任何模型在任何样本量下都表现不佳。后续模拟证实,猜测的巨大影响以及项目的极端简单性极大地影响了项目难度和个人能力的估计。

结论

即使在小样本中,将猜测的假设纳入 IRT 模型也可以提高参数估计的准确性。然而,无论是否使用 IRT 建模或正确百分比评分,都应谨慎解释从简单的二选一测试中获得的分数。

相似文献

1
Model choice and sample size in item response theory analysis of aphasia tests.失语症测验的项目反应理论分析中的模型选择和样本量。
Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2012 May;21(2):S38-50. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360(2011/11-0090). Epub 2012 Jan 9.
2
Development and Diagnostic Accuracy of a Shortened Dutch Naming Test for People with Aphasia Using Item Response Theory.运用项目反应理论为失语症患者开发的简化版荷兰语命名测试及其诊断准确性
Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2022 Nov 21;37(8):1735-1748. doi: 10.1093/arclin/acac057.
3
[The estimation of premorbid intelligence levels in French speakers].[法语使用者病前智力水平的评估]
Encephale. 2005 Jan-Feb;31(1 Pt 1):31-43. doi: 10.1016/s0013-7006(05)82370-x.
4
Item Response Theory Modeling of the Verb Naming Test.动词命名测验的项目反应理论建模。
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2023 May 9;66(5):1718-1739. doi: 10.1044/2023_JSLHR-22-00458. Epub 2023 Mar 31.
5
Testing Differential Item Functioning in Small Samples.小样本中的差异项目功能测试。
Multivariate Behav Res. 2020 Sep-Oct;55(5):722-747. doi: 10.1080/00273171.2019.1671162. Epub 2019 Oct 4.
6
A neural network paradigm for modeling psychometric data and estimating IRT model parameters: Cross estimation network.一种用于建模心理计量数据和估计 IRT 模型参数的神经网络范例:交叉估计网络。
Behav Res Methods. 2024 Oct;56(7):7026-7058. doi: 10.3758/s13428-024-02406-3. Epub 2024 Apr 12.
7
Linking outcomes from peabody picture vocabulary test forms using item response models.使用项目反应模型链接皮博迪图片词汇测试形式的结果。
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2012 Jun;55(3):754-63. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2011/10-0216). Epub 2012 Jan 9.
8
Predicting confrontation naming item difficulty.预测对答命名项目的难度。
Aphasiology. 2019;33(6):689-709. doi: 10.1080/02687038.2018.1495310. Epub 2018 Jul 23.
9
Assessing the Accuracy of Parameter Estimates in the Presence of Rapid Guessing Misclassifications.在存在快速猜测错误分类的情况下评估参数估计的准确性。
Educ Psychol Meas. 2022 Feb;82(1):122-150. doi: 10.1177/00131644211003640. Epub 2021 Apr 21.
10
Traditional scores versus IRT estimates on forced-choice tests based on a dominance model.基于优势模型的迫选测试中传统分数与项目反应理论估计值的比较
Psicothema. 2016;28(1):76-82. doi: 10.7334/psicothema2015.204.

引用本文的文献

1
Semantic memory for objects, actions, and events: A novel test of event-related conceptual semantic knowledge.物体、动作和事件的语义记忆:事件相关概念语义知识的新测试。
Cogn Neuropsychol. 2019 Oct-Dec;36(7-8):313-335. doi: 10.1080/02643294.2019.1656604. Epub 2019 Aug 26.